TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Bad Label Management?
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

yes i understand that you don't want to throw it to the bin because you didn't shut up well... good luck, the label concept it's completely overrated in trance nowadays, if it is cookie cutter is because of this policies.

Anyone know where you can find a list of all good trance labels and links to their demo submission page

quote:

Originally posted by orTof�nChiLd Anyone know where you can find a list of all good trance labels and links to their demo submission page

dude... how lazy are you? you'll spend 100hrs on a record but won't spend 10minutes to find the labels you'd like to send it to?

quote:

Originally posted by orTof�nChiLd Anyone know where you can find a list of all good trance labels and links to their demo submission page

trance.nu had a thread listing tons of labels and demo information but...

Yeah its better to find the info on your own. Go for the labels you really wanna be a part of, and don't just send the same email to all of them.

Trust me...they notice...and it goes a long way to be a bit more personal about it.

Haven't read the whole thread but here's my take on the situation.

If you put your foot down and tell them that you want it released as is, you run the risk of them releasing it, but not promoting it like they should. They might just not release it at all. I'm betting that you didn't get paid an advance in your contract, or even get an assurance in the contract that the track would be made available, which means it could just be thrown in the bin completely. After all, they didn't pay an advance, they have no incentive to release it, they haven't spent any money on it.

If you try to send the track to another label, chances are the label you've already signed with will try to block the release on the basis that they have distribution rights.

If you choose to bow to their pressure and change the track, you might get the release, but it sounds like the people you're dealing with are incredibly unprofessional, and you probably don't want people like that representing you on your first release IMO, because they'll fuck it up some way or other. And you run the risk of them being as incompetant at promoting a track as they are at signing one.

So your stuffed every which way.

If I were you, I'd try to either get them to tear up the contract completely, so that you're free to sign to another label. They aren't obligated to, but they might just do it if you phrase the request in the right way. I'd suggest to them politely that they scrap the release completely and you might come back to it in a year or so and send it to them again. And tell them that you'll give them another track to release at a later date.

If they won't come to the party, I'd go along with what they say, because you have no choice. And then I'd tell all my friends what ****s they are.

Nah, this doesn't sound like "bad label management" at all.

I'm not uptight about my music, so I like it when labels actually care about the music they put out. Them coaching you and coming with creative feedback most likely indicates that they're actually going to back you.

I take it that you're quite new to releasing music on good labels? If you had some releases under your belt, you'd know that alot of labels just let tracks "do their magic" on their own and don't push it at all. Having the label put some extra effort into finalizing the track means that they're more invested and will put more effort into pushing your track since they truly believe in it.

And man, just stop it. "So many problems"? You should quit the 'biz right now if you think these are problems. You won't cut it. This isn't a problem - You're being offered a service that people in any other field would call "creative consulting" and it's a quite expensive one too.

Just add the new lead, the label just wants the track to be less repetetive so they can pitch it better during listening sessions.

it all depends if the additional lead does something or completely ruins the track, in my case i said no because they wanted to leave the simplest melody, and i spent several hours writing the melody for that particular track, people loved it and didn't want to throw it to the bin because of someones taste.

I think for a label to ask you to change certain parts, add leads etc etc is absolutely fine.

I don't think it is okay though when they do this AFTER they have signed your tune. To me, if they sign it, it should mean they like it as it is (apart from minor mixing tweaks and mastering). If they want significant changes to the tracks composition, they should tell you this upfront and then it is up to you whether to make the changes and sign it to them or ignore them and go elsewhere.

quote:

Originally posted by Zombie0729 dude... how lazy are you? you'll spend 100hrs on a record but won't spend 10minutes to find the labels you'd like to send it to?

yeah i only know like 4 and none of them responded

quote:

Originally posted by Number2 trance.nu had a thread listing tons of labels and demo information but... Yeah its better to find the info on your own. Go for the labels you really wanna be a part of, and don't just send the same email to all of them. Trust me...they notice...and it goes a long way to be a bit more personal about it.

if you have the link that would be tremendous

quote:

Originally posted by spazztick And man, just stop it. "So many problems"? You should quit the 'biz right now if you think these are problems. You won't cut it. This isn't a problem - You're being offered a service that people in any other field would call "creative consulting" and it's a quite expensive one too. Just add the new lead, the label just wants the track to be less repetetive so they can pitch it better during listening sessions.

No, adding more production after I was asked to send "masters" IS a problem. If this was before, it might be a different story.

I think you took what i wrote the wrong way about "so many problems", yes I am new at this, but I know when I'm being pushed around, and this just isn't right.

Like other posters have said, if they wanted stuff changed, it should have been stated before mastering/signing the contract.

As far as the track being repetitive...you don't know that it is, or isn't so you cant make that judgement. The lead I have playing at that section only plays for 16 bars before they want me to add yet another lead ontop.

And as ive said already, i have ALOT going on at that point, and it does sound...way cluttered.

quote:

Originally posted by Number2 No, adding more production after I was asked to send "masters" IS a problem. If this was before, it might be a different story. I think you took what i wrote the wrong way about "so many problems", yes I am new at this, but I know when I'm being pushed around, and this just isn't right. Like other posters have said, if they wanted stuff changed, it should have been stated before mastering/signing the contract. As far as the track being repetitive...you don't know that it is, or isn't so you cant make that judgement. The lead I have playing at that section only plays for 16 bars before they want me to add yet another lead ontop. And as ive said already, i have ALOT going on at that point, and it does sound...way cluttered.

No, it's not a problem at all compared to what everyone in the 'biz goes through every single day. You're not being pushed around at all, this is peanuts. Grow thicker skin or you're doomed.

If that's the change they want you to make, that's the call they've made. They think it needs a change-up in order to be as good as it can be.

Keep the first and last few notes of the lead and make a fluid, cool, portamento-based lead between the notes of the first lead. Your track is probably just too samey and needs a bit more space and articulation to pop.

As far as the business goes, given notice even after mastering is still alot better compared to most; At least the label gives a damn.

if it sounds cluttered i think now 2 possible solutions:

-Special equialization, limiters,filters etc... which is a poor solution but getting rid of some "less-necesary" frequencies may help.

-Using a contrapoint melody, if they'vent specified you the change you've to do use your original melody and make a new lead that it's compatible with the original one and blend smoothly creating a "C melody" this can be a bit tricky but works fine, not many producers use this technique now but was very famous once upon a time.

WIth this last purpose you fill all the emptyness but sounds very harmonic if it's done properly, if you like this idea i think i can show you some tracks to get an idea of what to do.

If I may offer my 2 cents from the fence that I'm squarely perched upon...


I can see both sides of both sides here. The OP certainly has a legitimate gripe that the song was already signed before the label asked for the revisions. Changing one of the key elements of the song is something that should be discussed and agreed upon prior to signing the contract. That's just bad business on the label's behalf IMO.

That said, I also sense a little unwillingness to compromise on the OP's behalf, simply because he/she is being too idealistic and stubborn to even try the label's suggestion. We make compromises every time we change a parameter - some of these changes are negligible in context of the entire track, and some have ripple effects that change the entire character of the track, but most are somewhere in between the two extremes. I guess my point is just that there is no harm in trying the label's suggested changes AND giving it a fair shot with an open mind and time to let it sink in. In the time he/she has spent reading and replying to this thread, the OP could have tried it and either: (1) reinforced his/her opinion on the existing lead, or (2) realized that maybe the label was right after all and the suggested change actually did improve the overall quality of the track.

As others have pointed out, there's no guarantee that the label will release you from the contract, so IMO your best bet is to try to find some middle ground and not let your pride get in the way (well, not too much, at least).

let us fucking know!

quote:

Originally posted by orTof�nChiLd Anyone know where you can find a list of all good trance labels and links to their demo submission page

http://trance.nu/v4/forum/viewtopic.php?t=135142

quote:

Originally posted by G-Con I think for a label to ask you to change certain parts, add leads etc etc is absolutely fine. I don't think it is okay though when they do this AFTER they have signed your tune. To me, if they sign it, it should mean they like it as it is (apart from minor mixing tweaks and mastering). If they want significant changes to the tracks composition, they should tell you this upfront and then it is up to you whether to make the changes and sign it to them or ignore them and go elsewhere.

Bingo; also is there not legal precedent to tear up the deal because they signed it then requested the changes? This seems crooked

Also; lets stop acting like adding A SECOND LEAD is the same as turning a compressors ratio down. That's basically asking to completely change the musical idea the artist came up with.

quote:

Originally posted by mfitterer1 http://trance.nu/v4/forum/viewtopic.php?t=135142

THANK YOU

quote:

Originally posted by mfitterer1 Also; lets stop acting like adding A SECOND LEAD is the same as turning a compressors ratio down. That's basically asking to completely change the musical idea the artist came up with.

Particularly since they apparently asked him to add another lead after the track was mastered. As an artist facing a request for mastering from the label, I'd have sent the song off to a mastering service. I would be super-pissed to have then been asked to add another track after having spent money on that.

It's weird, because I'd think, as a label, I'd want to be in possession of the mixdown and send it off to be mastered (or, at least do it, in house), myself.

i personally feel like label feedback is much appreciated, they listen, in my opinion, more closely than your friends would. they have a vested interest to do so, it's their name they're slapping at the end of this release. XYZ Artist - XYZ Track [XYZ Label].

now most label's won't give you ultimatums regarding changes, they'll simply give advice. humor them, give it a try and see if you concur. if you really feel like it does a disservice to your track, tell the label, most of them are promoting artistic creativity on a daily basis... they'll understand.

I think there is a difference between trying to give good input to a track, and trying to force the artist into a funnel of your own design, ment to give your label some unique sound and/or shape the music and what people like, yourselves, as opposed to letting it naturally develope.

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik If I may offer my 2 cents from the fence that I'm squarely perched upon... I can see both sides of both sides here. The OP certainly has a legitimate gripe that the song was already signed before the label asked for the revisions. Changing one of the key elements of the song is something that should be discussed and agreed upon prior to signing the contract. That's just bad business on the label's behalf IMO. That said, I also sense a little unwillingness to compromise on the OP's behalf, simply because he/she is being too idealistic and stubborn to even try the label's suggestion. We make compromises every time we change a parameter - some of these changes are negligible in context of the entire track, and some have ripple effects that change the entire character of the track, but most are somewhere in between the two extremes. I guess my point is just that there is no harm in trying the label's suggested changes AND giving it a fair shot with an open mind and time to let it sink in. In the time he/she has spent reading and replying to this thread, the OP could have tried it and either: (1) reinforced his/her opinion on the existing lead, or (2) realized that maybe the label was right after all and the suggested change actually did improve the overall quality of the track. As others have pointed out, there's no guarantee that the label will release you from the contract, so IMO your best bet is to try to find some middle ground and not let your pride get in the way (well, not too much, at least).

Totally agree with you on most here, Im not sure if i mentioned it at all but i did spend days working on new stuff for that section of the song, before i even posted this thread, and after. I can't come up with anything to justify it. I wasn't unwilling to try something new, but when everyone of my peers who have heard the track (most of them pro-producers/DJs) and even they agree with me that it would be to cluttered...its a little intense for me, and makes me unwilling to compromise the direction i was going with the track.

Let me be clear, they arnt asking me to write a different lead...they are asking for a new one..ontop..of an already existing lead.

I would provide samples, and if the deal goes through, i def will so i can get your guys's opinion. But for now i have to keep it hush hush.

For the B-side, i spent days cleaning that up and hopefully they like that version, which was not mastered to begin with, but yeah, asking for edits to the track after they asked for the master is really unprofessional to me.

and to the guy with 1 post, whos telling me to grow some skin and that ill never make it,

Ive already made it farther than i ever dreamed of in the first place, but as an artist, im not willing to put something out that i am not happy with. Period. Why would i release something, that im not proud of? Just to get some airplay? No

Thanks but no thanks...Id rather give up the release...and wait for a better opportunity.

With that said, it's up to the label now, it's been sent out, along with the newer version of the Bside. Ill keep you all updated on how they handle it.

I'd say yes, this is a case of bad management. Any intelligent A&R would not sign a track if he isn't 100% confident about it's quality.

quote:

Originally posted by Zombie0729 i personally feel like label feedback is much appreciated, they listen, in my opinion, more closely than your friends would. they have a vested interest to do so, it's their name they're slapping at the end of this release. XYZ Artist - XYZ Track [XYZ Label]. now most label's won't give you ultimatums regarding changes, they'll simply give advice. humor them, give it a try and see if you concur. if you really feel like it does a disservice to your track, tell the label, most of them are promoting artistic creativity on a daily basis... they'll understand.

Agree. Maybe they are just making suggestions and seeing what the OP thinks. He didn't actually mention that the track wouldn't be released unless he made the changes...

quote:

Originally posted by mfitterer1 Bingo; also is there not legal precedent to tear up the deal because they signed it then requested the changes? This seems crooked Also; lets stop acting like adding A SECOND LEAD is the same as turning a compressors ratio down. That's basically asking to completely change the musical idea the artist came up with.

Yes and no. As far as I'm aware, once you sign a track to a label, you give them distribution rights, but they have no obligation to release it. Thats whats wrong with the current contracts in dance music, you get no advance, they don't have to release the track, and you can't sign it to another label because you've signed away the rights. So they can hold that over you, because if they don't release the track, you make no money. They can basically ask for whatever changes they like on that basis. You can refuse, but you'll be the one to lose out.

quote:

Originally posted by spazztick And man, just stop it. "So many problems"? You should quit the 'biz right now if you think these are problems. You won't cut it. This isn't a problem - You're being offered a service that people in any other field would call "creative consulting" and it's a quite expensive one too.

You might be tiesto for all I know and be the most succesful producer in the world. But I think your completely wrong about this. Many people send their tracks off to be mastered professionally. Most people never see any money from their releases, so this is money down the toilet for them. If the label wants an element added after the track is already mastered, that means another round of mastering, which will cost more money which the producer will never get back. That seems like a pretty big problem to me, and if the label doesn't realise that, I think that's unprofessional.

My 2 cents.

quote:

Originally posted by Number2 Thanks but no thanks...Id rather give up the release...and wait for a better opportunity.

Have a feeling this is going to be what has to happen but in the end it will only make you realize that the industry doesn't own you if you don't let them.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.